Understanding and optimising helmet-related and other health and social effects of the first North American university campus skatepark
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skateboarding has growing societal uptake, as seen through its inclusion in 2021’s Summer Olympics. To promote positive health and social outcomes, skateparks are being developed around the world. A challenge in optimising skateparks’ benefits lies in reducing injury risk, particularly head trauma. This study occurred at the University of British Columbia Skatepark (July–September 2019) with the goal of identifying and theoretically contextualising facilitators and barriers to helmet use. Participants (total n = 54, 92.6% male) were interviewed (n = 54) and surveyed (n = 27). We performed thematic analysis on the transcripts, finding that barriers to helmet use included helmet discomfort, low perceived risk of injury, cultural norms, and style, and facilitators included a belief that helmets promote safety, higher-risk skating activities, older and younger ages, and role modelling. We propose a conceptual model showing multiple points of intervention to promote skatepark safety beyond helmet use alone, integrating theories of sociology, social psychology, and public health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it